Sometimes when we discuss 3K vs HPUX we discuss the technical
differences between the machines.  However the issue is not
technical but more managerial.  I cannot agree with you more
about the superiority of the 3K vs other machines.  And the
people who know me can agree to that.
 
However the issue at hand is does HP really care about the 3K
and are there good reasons for HP to care.  Being a *cash cow*
is a good reason to care.
Depending on the industry, you may manage a cash cow by cutting
all expenses and hoping it will survive.  In the computer
industry that will be killing your *cash cow* not perpetuating
it.  So cutting your expenses to the bone as George suggest
would kill this cash cow.   So there is certainly no profit
incentive to cut costs to the bone.  However there is one sign
that the 3K is a cash cow is the number of new customers using
the 3k versus the number of new customers using HPUX.  HPUX is
enjoying high growth with new customers.   The 3k is enjoying
some growth with existing customers relatively.
 
In Michigan, where I am a consultant and a users group
president, I know there are constantly new HPUX members and few
new  MPE members.  Interex has similar statistics and MARUG
mentioned that too.  This type of characteristics makes the 3k
a cash cow.
 
George tells us about the MPE--HPUX merger discussion.  The
question is putting POSIX in MPE better for the cash cow or
putting MPE in HPUX better for the cash cow.  Clearly if you
want to contribute to the perpetuation of the cash cow you
would put POSIX in MPE.  The other way you would kill your cash
cow.
 
If you want to market your cash cow, who are your most likely
buyers?  Obviously your existing customer base.  If most of
your sales are to new customers would you market that only to
existing customers.  I think not.  The way you keep your
existing customers is totally different from marketing to new
customers.  It is much easier, to market to existing customers
than to new customers.
 
Other examples today of cash cows are VAXes, and IBM
Mainframes.  Examples of product lines that never made it to
being a cash cow or the cash cow was mismanaged are DG's,
WANG's, CDC, HONEYWELL, BURROGHS, NCR and many more.  These are
examples of "dogs".
 
A definition of  cash cow is the following:
 
A business with high relative market share in a low growth
markets will produce healthy cash flows, which can be used to
fund other developing businesses.
 
Dog - business with low relative share in a low market growth
will be modest cash users.  They will be  cash traps because of
their weak competitive position.
 
Star --- Businesses with high relative share in high growth
markets usually will require large amounts of cash to sustain
growth but have a strong market postion that will yield high
reported profits.  They may be nearly in cash balance.
 
Wildcats - Businesses with low relative share in rapidly
growing markets require large cash inflows to finance growth
and are weak cash generators because of their poor competitive
position.
 
These definitions come from Competitive Strategies by Michael
Porter of the Harvard Business School printed in 1980.
 
You compare.  It is clear to me that 3K is a cash cow by his
definition.  HP-UX and Laserjets are Stars.
 
The positive cash flow generated by the 3k will not be
abandoned by HP any time soon and they will continue to ensure
that these cash flows continue.  Once you see that the 3K
starts becoming a DOG, then you can start expressing some
concern over the demise of the 3K
 
This is a marketing and mangerial perspective not a technical
perspective.  Again I believe that the 3K is a superior
solution technically and HPUX has its problems but the 3k
certainly meets Michael Porter's definition of a cash cow.
 
 
Terry Warns
WL Software
Troy,  MI  48098
1-800-397-7097